{"id":272200,"date":"1994-05-11T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1994-05-10T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994"},"modified":"2017-07-02T19:56:10","modified_gmt":"2017-07-02T14:26:10","slug":"hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994","title":{"rendered":"Hardev Singh vs State Of Punjab on 11 May, 1994"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Hardev Singh vs State Of Punjab on 11 May, 1994<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1994 SCC, Supl. (2) 282 JT 1994 (4)\t120<\/div>\n
Author: K J Reddy<\/div>\n
Bench: Reddy, K. Jayachandra (J)<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nHARDEV SINGH\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF PUNJAB\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT11\/05\/1994\n\nBENCH:\nREDDY, K. JAYACHANDRA (J)\nBENCH:\nREDDY, K. JAYACHANDRA (J)\nYOGESHWAR DAYAL (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1994 SCC  Supl.  (2) 282 JT 1994 (4)\t120\n 1994 SCALE  (2)900\n\n\nACT:\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\nK.   JAYACHANDRA  REDDY,  J.-  Original\t accused  3  is\t the
\nappellant  in  Criminal Appeal No. 12 of 1982  and  original
\naccused\t 4  is the appellant in Criminal Appeal No.  400  of
\n1982.\tThey along with six others were tried  for  offences
\npunishable under Sections 302<\/a>, 302<\/a>\/149<\/a>, 307<\/a> and 307<\/a>\/149<\/a>\t IPC
\nand  under  Section  27<\/a> of the Arms Act.   The\ttrial  court
\nacquitted A-5 to A-8 and convicted A-1 to A-4 and  sentenced
\nthem  to  imprisonment\tfor life in respect  of\t the  murder
\ncharge and various other terms of imprisonment in respect of
\nother offences.\t The appeal preferred by them was  dismissed
\nby the High Court.\n<\/p>\n
2.   It\t may  be  mentioned at this stage  that\t during\t the
\npendency  of the special leave petition in this\t Court\tA-1,
\nHardeep\t Singh died and the special leave petition filed  by
\nA-2,  Baljinder Singh was dismissed.  Therefore we are\tleft
\nwith
\n+    From  the\tJudgment  and Order dated  6-8-1981  of\t the
\nPunjab and Haryana High Court in Crl.  Appeal No. 773-DB of’
\n1980<\/span>
\n283<\/span>
\nonly  A-3 Hardev Singh and A-4, Jaspal Singh who  figure  as
\nappellants in these two appeals.\n<\/p>\n
3.   The prosecution case is as follows: Hardeep Singh,\t A-1
\nand  his son Jaspal Singh, A-4 are the residents of  Village
\nSalewala.   A-2\t is  the Sarpanch and  resident\t of  Village
\nKhanewal.   A-3 belongs to another Village Khang.  A-5,\t one
\nof  the acquitted accused also belongs to Village  Khanewal.
\nA-6  to A-8 belong to Village Salewala.\t Two  months  before
\nthe  present occurrence Amritpal Singh, deceased 1  and\t one
\nSarbjit Singh had quarrelled with Kuldip Singh, Sarpanch, A-
\n7,  one of the acquitted accused and brother of A-1, at\t the
\nPatiala\t bus  stand.  A-3 is the wife’s\t brother  of  Kuldip
\nSingh.\t On  22-7-1979,\t Partap\t Singh, PW  4  and  his\t son
\nAmritpal  Singh,  deceased 1 and Satbir Singh  had  gone  to
\nPattran\t for  making some purchases and they started  to  go
\nback to their village at 5 p.m. The deceased was driving the
\nmotorcycle and Harbans Singh Sarpanch, deceased 2 and Surjit
\nSingh,\tPW  6  were sitting on the  pillion  seat.   Another
\nmotorcycle was driven by Sarbjit Singh and Satbir Singh\t and
\nPartap\tSingh, PW 4 were sitting on the pillion seat.\tWhen
\nthey reached near the Sam Nala bridge after crossing Village
\nSalewala,  they noticed A-1, armed with a .12 bore gun,\t A-2
\narmed  with  .31  5 bore rifle and A-3\tarmed  with  gandasa
\nhiding\tin  the Akk plants.  At that  time  Amritpal  Singh,
\ndeceased 1 was going ahead on the motorcycle than the  other
\none.   While  so  both A-1 and A-2 fired one  shot  each  on
\nAmritpal Singh, deceased 1 who fell down after receiving the
\ninjuries  along\t with Harbans Singh, deceased 2\t and  Surjit
\nSingh,\tPW  6 towards the left of the road.   Just  at\tthat
\njuncture,  a  truck  driven by A-4 came\t from  the  side  of
\nVillage\t Khanewal.   In that it is alleged  that  the  other
\nacquitted  accused  were sitting by the side of\t the  driver
\narmed with .12 bore pistol etc. and they raised lalkaras  to
\nkill  the  deceased and according to  the  prosecution,\t the
\ntruck went and hit and ran over the motorcycle.\t The gun  of
\ndeceased  1  which was in the hands of deceased 2  was\talso
\nbroken.\t  The three persons coming on the  other  motorcycle
\ncame forward to save them but the accused in the truck fired
\nbut  nobody  was  hit.\tThe truck got stuck  in\t the  water.
\nAmritpal  Singh,  deceased  1 had already  died\t because  of
\ngunshot injury and Harbans Singh, deceased 2 was unconscious
\nand Surjit Singh, PW 6 was lying injured outside the  water.
\nOne  Jagjit Singh came and took the injured Surjit Singh  to
\nthe  hospital  and the injured Harbans Singh  was  taken  by
\nanother\t person to the hospital in a car leaving  others  at
\nthe  place of occurrence.  Partap Singh left for the  police
\nstation\t and lodged a report before ASI, Kehar Singh, PW  17
\nand  the  case\twas  registered.  Surjit  Singh,  PW  6\t was
\nexamined  by Dr Barjesh Modi, PW 1. He found  two  lacerated
\nwounds\tand  a\tswelling and two  abrasions.   After  X-ray,
\ninjuries 1 and 2 were declared grievous.  The doctor  opined
\nthat  he  could\t have received these  injuries\tby  striking
\nagainst\t the running truck.  Dr C.L. Verma, PW\t3  conducted
\nthe postmortem on the dead body of deceased 1 and he found a
\ngunshot\t wound\ton  the\t right side  of\t the  forehead.\t  On
\ndissection,  the frontal bone was found to be fractured\t and
\nthe  brain  matter was punctured and it was opined  that  he
\ndied due to this gunshot injury.  Deceased 2 meanwhile died.
\nThe same doctor, PW 3, also conducted postmortem on his dead
\nbody and found several abrasions all over the body and\tleft
\nthigh  and  left  leg were found to  be\t pinkish  blue.\t  On
\ninternal examination he found fractures of clavicle and\t 3rd
\nto  10th rib on the right side, puncture of right  lung\t and
\nfractures  of 2nd to 10th rib on the left side.\t  The  other
\ninternal  organs  like liver and kidneys were  found  to  be
\nruptured.  The doctor
\n284<\/span>
\nopined\tthat the death was due to shock and haemorrhage\t due
\nto  these injuries and he also opined that all the  injuries
\non the body of deceased 2 could be the result of an accident
\nwith  a\t heavy\tvehicle.   ASI,\t PW  17\t got  the  place  of
\noccurrence  photographed and he found some empty  cartridges
\nat the scene of occurrence which he seized.  The truck which
\ngot stuck in the water was also taken into possession.\t The
\naccused\t  were\t arrested  and\tafter  completion   of\t the
\ninvestigation,\tthe charge-sheet was laid.  The\t prosecution
\nexamined  as  many  as 18 witnesses.  PWs 1  to\t 3  are\t the
\ndoctors,  PW 4 Partap Singh is the father of deceased 1\t who
\ngave the report.  PW 6 is the injured witness.\tThe rest are
\nall official or panch witnesses.\n<\/p>\n
4.   The accused denied all the allegations.  A-1,  however,
\nstated\tthat  the  two deceased persons and  PW\t 6  received
\ninjuries in the motorcycle accident when they were going  at
\na  high\t speed and could not control and that the  truck  in
\nquestion  was driven by one Baldev Singh and not by A-4\t and
\nBaldev Singh tried to avert the accident and in that attempt
\nhe  took  the truck to the extreme right and went  into\t the
\nditches and during the same PW 6 also received injuries\t and
\nthat the persons on the motorcycle were carrying a gun which
\nwent  off accidentally by their fall and caused injuries  to
\ndeceased 1. A-4 stated that he was a student and he was\t not
\nat  the scene of occurrence.  The other accused\t in  general
\ndenied\tthe occurrence and examined some defence  witnesses.
\nThe  trial court relied on the evidence of PWs 4 and  6\t and
\nheld  that  A-1 to A-3 were waiting in hiding and  when\t the
\nmotorcycle  driven by deceased 1 came, they  advanced.\t A-1
\nand  A-2 fired at D-1 who was hit by the shot fired  by\t A-1
\nand the shot fired by A-2 did not hit him.  The trial  Judge
\nfurther\t held  that A-1 to A-3 had the common  intention  to
\ncause  the death of deceased 1. He also held that the  other
\nfive  accused  reached in the truck after the  deceased\t was
\nalready\t hit  with  gun and therefore they  cannot  be\theld
\nliable for the murder of deceased 1. He, however, held\tthat
\nA-4 who was driving the truck had overrun deceased 1 and  PW
\n6 and therefore he had also the intention to cause the death
\nof  deceased 1 and accordingly convicted him  under  Section
\n302<\/a>  read with Section 34<\/a> IPC and Section 302<\/a> in respect  of
\ndeaths\tof deceased 1 and deceased 2 respectively.  He\talso
\nconvicted A-4 under Section 307<\/a> IPC for causing injuries  to
\nPW 6 by dashing him against the truck and the other  accused
\nwere  convicted\t under\tSections 302<\/a>\/34<\/a> IPC.   A-1  is\talso
\nconvicted under Section 27<\/a> of the Arms Act.  The High  Court
\nagreed\twith the findings of the trial court  and  confirmed
\nthe  convictions  and  sentences.  A-3,\t Hardev\t Singh,\t the
\nappellant  in Criminal Appeal No. 12 of 1982 has  been\tmade
\nconstructively\tliable along with A-1 and A-2 in respect  of
\nthe  murder of deceased 1. According to the  prosecution  he
\nwas  armed with a gandasa and was in the company of A-1\t and
\nA-2  who  shot at deceased 1 but he was hit by\tthe  gunshot
\nfired by A-1.  Learned counsel submits that the case of\t A-3
\nis  in\tno  way different from the  case  of  the  acquitted
\naccused\t A-5 to A-8, who according to the prosecution,\twere
\nseated\tin the truck armed with pistol and gun and who\talso
\nraised\tlalkaras  instigating to kill the deceased.   It  is
\nalso  submitted that A-3 had not used his gandasa on  anyone
\nand in a case of this nature arising out of acute enmity, it
\nis highly unsafe to convict A-3.  We find considerable force
\nin  this  submission.\tPW 6,  the  injured  witness  simply
\ndeposed that A-3 was there along with A-1 and A-2 and raised
\na lalkara.  Therefore we agree with the learned counsel that
\nhis  case  is  in no way different from that  of  the  other
\nacquitted  accused.   Therefore he is also entitled  to\t the
\nbenefit of doubt.\n<\/p>\n
285<\/span><\/p>\n
5.  Now\t coming\t to  the case  of  A-4,\t Jaspal\t Singh,\t the
\nappellant   in\tCriminal  Appeal  No.  400  of\t 1982,\t the
\nprosecution  case is that after D-1 was hit by the  gunshot,
\nthe  truck driven by A-4 came there and dashed\tagainst\t the
\nmotorcycle driven by deceased 1 which had already fallen and
\nran over it.  It is in evidence that deceased 1\t was driving
\nthe  motorcycle\t and  he fell down because  of\tthe  gunshot
\ninjury.\t Consequently the motorcycle also fell to a side and
\ndeceased 2 and PW 6 who were on the pillion also fell  down.
\nThen, according to the prosecution, the truck ran over\tthem
\ncausing injuries to deceased 2 and Surjit    Singh, PW 6. On
\nthis  aspect, the evidence of PW 6 is rather important.\t  He
\ndeposed that the motorcycle was driven by deceased 1 and  he
\nand  deceased  2  were sitting on  the\tpillion\t and  before
\nstarting  deceased 1 handed over his own gun to\t deceased  2
\nand when they were nearing the Sam Nala bridge, they saw A-1
\nand  A-2 armed with a gun and a rifle respectively  and\t A-3
\narmed  with a gandasa hiding behind Akk plants and that\t A-1
\nand A-2 fired and the shot fired   by\t A-1   struck\t the
\nforehead  of deceased 1 as a result of which they fell\tdown
\nfrom the motorcycle along with the motorcycle and just\tthen
\nA-4  drove the truck towards them and all the three of\tthem
\nwere dragged by the truck along with the motorcycle  towards
\nthe  ditches.  PW 6 further deposed that he was hit  by\t the
\nside  of  the truck as a result of which his  left  leg\t and
\nright  arm  were  fractured.  In  the  cross-examination  he
\nstated\tthat  all  the\tthree  of  them\t entangled  in\t the
\nmotorcycle  when  it fell down.\t He also  admitted  that  he
\ncould not say if    the truck had gone out of control before
\nproceeding towards the ditches.\t He added that the truck had
\npassed over the motorcycle but again stated that no wheel of
\nthe  truck passed over it and that he did not  notice  which
\npart  of the motorcycle was hit by the truck.\tHe  admitted
\nthat  deceased 1 was also hit by the left side of the  truck
\nand that the motorcycle and deceased 2 were hit by the front
\nportion\t of the truck.\tPW 4, the other eyewitness, who\t was
\ntravelling in the   other motorcycle deposed that deceased 1
\nfell down after being hit by the gunshot along with deceased
\n2  and PW 6 to their left and that the truck driven  by\t A-4
\ncame  and  ran\tover  the  fallen  people.   In\t the  cross-
\nexamination  he stated that after their fall none  of  their
\nbodies came under the motorcycle but he added that wheel  of
\nthe truck passed over the motorcycle.  He, however, admitted
\nthat  none  of the riders was overrun by the wheels  of\t the
\ntruck and that the truck hit\t   against  the\t motorcycle.
\nA  perusal of the chief-examinations and  cross-examinations
\nof these two witnesses would show that they could not give a
\ncorrect\t picture  as to how the truck  hit  the\t motorcycle.
\nRelying\t on these admissions, the learned  counsel  strongly
\ncontended  that at the most it can be an accident or a\trash
\nand negligent act and that Section 302<\/a> IPC cannot be invoked
\nby  any\t stretch  of imagination by  calling  it  a  murder.
\nHaving\t examined  the\tevidence  of  PW  4,  we   do\tfind
\nconsiderable  force  in this submission.   That\t apart,\t the
\nmedical\t  evidence  assumes  importance.  PW  1,  a  doctor,
\nexamined  PW  6 and found six injuries on  him.\t  The  first
\ninjury\twas a swelling pain on the right elbow,\t the  second
\nwas  painful tender swelling over the left thigh, the  third
\nwas only an abrasion below the left nipple of the chest, the
\nfourth\tone was a bruise on the left arm just  above  elbow,
\nthe fifth one was a lacerated wound on the posterior  aspect
\nof left thigh just above the knee and the sixth injury was a
\nlacerated      wound skin deep on the dorsum of right  foot.
\nThe  doctor opined that the possibility of  receiving  these
\ninjuries  being\t caused by striking with a truck  cannot  be
\nruled  out.   In  the  cross-examination  the  doctor  again
\nadmitted that the
\n286<\/span>
\npossibility  of PW 6 receiving these injuries by fall  of  a
\nmotorcycle  along with the motorcycle cannot be\t ruled\tout.
\nAnother significant admission made by him    is that he\t did
\nnot  find any crush injury. He also stated that if  a  truck
\noverruns,      there  would  be crush injuries on  the\tpart
\ncoming under the truck. This medical\tevidence amply shows
\nthat the truck did not pass over on any part of the body  of
\nPW  6  but at the most he could have received  the  injuries
\nbecause of the fall after     being  knocked  down.  PW\t  3,
\nanother doctor, who conducted the postmortem of\t  deceased I
\nfound  only one gunshot injury on the forehead which  caused
\nthe death and another lacerated ‘wound bone deep on the left
\nleg and another\t    abrasion  on the medial  aspect  of
\nthe  left  leg. These injuries would show  that\t deceased  1
\nthough\tgot entangled with deceased 2 and PW 6 due to  fall,
\nbut did\t  not  receive\tany injury by virtue  of  the  truck
\ndashing against the motorcycle.\t   PW  3 also conducted\t the
\npostmortem on the dead body of deceased 2. He\t  found\t six
\nabrasions and some portions of the body being pinkish  blue.
\nOn   dissection\t he found fracture of the clavicle and\tribs
\nand rupture of kidneys and    liver.  He  opined  that\t the
\ninjuries on deceased 2 can be the result of heavy     vehicle
\naccident.  In  the cross-examination he\t admitted  that\t the
\nabrasions can be    the\t result\t of rubbing against  a\thard
\nsurface and some of the injuries can be the  result of\tfall
\nfrom  motorcycle  on uneven ground. The doctor did  not\t say
\nthat he\t  noticed any crush injuries. From his evidence also
\nit cannot be ruled out that the\t   injuries can be due to  a
\nheavy vehicle accident and there is no re-examination  clarifying
\nthe  position. As already mentioned the plea of the  accused
\nhad been     that some driver was driving the truck  which
\nwent out of control resulting in   accident  and  since\t the
\ndriver\ttried to avert, the truck went into the ditches\t and
\ngot  stuck in the water. If really it was the  intention  of
\nthe driver, whoever he\t may be, to dash against the victims
\nwith a view to commit murder, he could\thave\t hit\t and
\nproceeded.  The\t fact  that it got into\t the  ditches  would
\nprobabilise    the   theory   of   accident.   Under   these
\ncircumstances, we find it difficult to uphold\t  the
\nconviction of A-4 for the offence of murder. However, it  is
\nclear that he  drove  the  vehicle in a rash  and  negligent
\nmanner and consequently he would be\tliable under Section
\n304-A<\/a> IPC.\n<\/p>\n
6.  For the aforesaid reasons A-3 Hardev Singh is  acquitted
\nand Criminal Appeal No. 12 of 1982 filed by him is  allowed.
\nAll the convictions and\t sentences   awarded  against\tA-4,
\nJaspal Singh are set aside. Instead he ‘IS     convicted
\nunder Section 304-A<\/a> IPC and sentenced to undergo two  years’
\nRI. In\t  the  view we have taken namely that Jaspal  Singh,
\nA-4 was responsible for\t causing the death of Harbans Singh,
\ndeceased 2 and injuries to Surjit Singh,     PW\t 6  by\trash
\nand  negligent\tdriving, we think this is a fit\t case  where
\nJaspal\tSingh,\tA-4  should be directed\t to  pay  sufficient
\namount by way of compensation\t   to  the  legal  heirs  of
\nHarbans Singh, deceased 2 and to Surjit Singh, PW 6.   Accordingly
\nas  provided  under Section 357<\/a> CrPC, Jaspal Singh,  A-4  is
\ndirected     to\t pay Rs 30,000 by way of  compensation\tto
\nthe legal heirs of Harbans Singh,  deceased 2 and Rs  10,000
\nto  Surjit  Singh, PW 6. If the amounts\t are  not  deposited
\nwithin three months from today, the same shall be  recovered
\nand paid to the\t    legal heirs of Harbans Singh, deceased 2
\nand to Surjit Singh, PW 6 as provided\tunder  Section\t 357<\/a>
\nread, with Section 431<\/a> CrPC. Accordingly Criminal Appeal No.
\n400 of 1982 filed by him is partly allowed.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t    287<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Hardev Singh vs State Of Punjab on 11 May, 1994 Equivalent citations: 1994 SCC, Supl. (2) 282 JT 1994 (4) 120 Author: K J Reddy Bench: Reddy, K. Jayachandra (J) PETITIONER: HARDEV SINGH Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF PUNJAB DATE OF JUDGMENT11\/05\/1994 BENCH: REDDY, K. JAYACHANDRA (J) BENCH: REDDY, K. JAYACHANDRA (J) […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-272200","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nHardev Singh vs State Of Punjab on 11 May, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Hardev Singh vs State Of Punjab on 11 May, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1994-05-10T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-07-02T14:26:10+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"14 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Hardev Singh vs State Of Punjab on 11 May, 1994\",\"datePublished\":\"1994-05-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-02T14:26:10+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994\"},\"wordCount\":2812,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994\",\"name\":\"Hardev Singh vs State Of Punjab on 11 May, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1994-05-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-02T14:26:10+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Hardev Singh vs State Of Punjab on 11 May, 1994\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Hardev Singh vs State Of Punjab on 11 May, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Hardev Singh vs State Of Punjab on 11 May, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1994-05-10T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-07-02T14:26:10+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"14 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Hardev Singh vs State Of Punjab on 11 May, 1994","datePublished":"1994-05-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-02T14:26:10+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994"},"wordCount":2812,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994","name":"Hardev Singh vs State Of Punjab on 11 May, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1994-05-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-02T14:26:10+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardev-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-11-may-1994#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Hardev Singh vs State Of Punjab on 11 May, 1994"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/272200","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=272200"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/272200\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=272200"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=272200"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=272200"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}